FAA says 2 different things, flying over people

Joined
Jan 16, 2019
Messages
27
Reaction score
10
Age
43
Location
South Dakota
I just noticed this. Can anyone clear this up for me? Both found on FAA website
Part 107 Summary, dated June 21, 2016
- Small unmanned aircraft may not operate over any persons not directly participating in the operation, not under a covered structure, and not inside a covered stationary vehicle.

Link: https://www.faa.gov/uas/media/Part_107_Summary.pdf

AC_107-2AFS-1_Signed (Circular) 5.11, dated June 21 2016
- Prohibited Operation Over Persons. Part 107 prohibits a person from flying a small UA directly over a person who is not under a safe cover, such as a protective structure or a stationary vehicle.

Link: https://www.faa.gov/uas/resources/policy_library/media/AC_107-2_AFS-1_Signed.pdf

Thanks.
 
Joined
Oct 24, 2018
Messages
1,150
Reaction score
764
Simple. If you are filming a commercial video and you need to fly over an actor, you can, because s/he is part of the job. You can't go to the beach and fly over a hot girl in a bikini, because she isn't part of your crew and if that drone falls from the sky, you will hurt her. Basically just follow the simple, never fly over anyone that isn't involved with your operation.
 
Joined
Jan 16, 2019
Messages
27
Reaction score
10
Age
43
Location
South Dakota
Hi Ansia, thanks for the reply. I get that part, but one says you cannot fly over people even if they are under a covered structure or in a stationary vehicle. The other states you can fly over people under a structure and inside a stationary vehicle. I guess I have been going by the one that allows to fly over people as long as they are covered and protected. I just happen to be reading through regulations and noticed the discrepancy. Is the Circular the rule or the summary?
 
Joined
Oct 24, 2018
Messages
1,150
Reaction score
764
Hi Ansia, thanks for the reply. I get that part, but one says you cannot fly over people even if they are under a covered structure or in a stationary vehicle. The other states you can fly over people under a structure and inside a stationary vehicle. I guess I have been going by the one that allows to fly over people as long as they are covered and protected. I just happen to be reading through regulations and noticed the discrepancy. Is the Circular the rule or the summary?
The wording is different, but they say the exact same thing.

Part 107 Summary, dated June 21, 2016
- Small unmanned aircraft may not operate over any persons not directly participating in the operation, not under a covered structure, and not inside a covered stationary vehicle.

In here it says not under a covered structure. What they ment is that if the person isn't under a covered structure, then you can't fly over.
 
Joined
Aug 17, 2014
Messages
1,354
Reaction score
559
Location
Long Island, NY
Simple. If you are filming a commercial video and you need to fly over an actor, you can, because s/he is part of the job.
That's actually incorrect. Read the above. An actor may be involved in the filming of a video commercial, but he/she is not directly involved in the operation of the sUAS. Therefore the operator is not allowed to fly over the actors or anyone else in the production crew that are not under the direct supervision of the PIC.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bsartist
Joined
Oct 24, 2018
Messages
1,150
Reaction score
764
That's actually incorrect. Read the above. An actor may be involved in the filming of a video commercial, but he/she is not directly involved in the operation of the sUAS. Therefore the operator is not allowed to fly over them.
Yes, you are correct.
 
Joined
Aug 17, 2014
Messages
1,354
Reaction score
559
Location
Long Island, NY
I think that rule is misunderstood by many. Myself included when the regs first came out and I didn't know the details.
 

BigAl07

Administrator
Staff Member
Premium Pilot
Joined
Jan 5, 2015
Messages
6,562
Reaction score
5,173
Age
48
Location
Western North Carolina
There are only (3) ways for a Commercial Operator to "legally" fly over people who are not part of your Flight Crew:

a) 107.39 Flight over people waiver
b) Section 333 Exemption with a Closed Set Allowance
c) If flying for Public Safety you can get your COA to include "Flight over participants" (other searches etc that are cleared into the area) or you can possibly get a SGI (formerly E-COA) to allow "Flight over participants" (other searches etc that are cleared into the area)

I've seen time and time again people thinking and stating "Oh these people are part of the event/production/ceremony" so they are included OR "We had everyone at the event sign a release of liability so we can fly over them"... both are VERY wrong.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ansia
Joined
Jan 4, 2016
Messages
7,824
Reaction score
3,089
Location
Australia
I just noticed this. Can anyone clear this up for me? Both found on FAA website
Part 107 Summary, dated June 21, 2016
- Small unmanned aircraft may not operate over any persons not directly participating in the operation, not under a covered structure, and not inside a covered stationary vehicle.

Link: https://www.faa.gov/uas/media/Part_107_Summary.pdf

AC_107-2AFS-1_Signed (Circular) 5.11, dated June 21 2016
- Prohibited Operation Over Persons. Part 107 prohibits a person from flying a small UA directly over a person who is not under a safe cover, such as a protective structure or a stationary vehicle.

Link: https://www.faa.gov/uas/resources/policy_library/media/AC_107-2_AFS-1_Signed.pdf

Thanks.
There is no contradiction in the two references you have provided- at least not with respect to flying over persons involved in the operation.

You might have missed it but if you go back to 107-2 it seems to be covered clearly;

  1. 5.11 Prohibited Operation Over Persons. Part 107 prohibits a person from flying a small UA directly over a person who is not under a safe cover, such as a protective structure or a stationary vehicle. However, a small UA may be flown over a person who is directly participating in the operation of the sUAS, such as the remote PIC, other person manipulating the controls, a VO, or crewmembers necessary for the safety of the sUAS operation, as assigned and briefed by the remote PIC.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BigAl07
Joined
Dec 17, 2018
Messages
55
Reaction score
22
Age
62
So 107 pilots have more restrictions
Non 107 pilots dont have to abide by these... right?
 
Joined
Oct 24, 2018
Messages
1,150
Reaction score
764
So 107 pilots have more restrictions
Non 107 pilots dont have to abide by these... right?
Non 107 have to abide to the same restrictions. They are just vague and people find loopholes.
 
Joined
Dec 17, 2018
Messages
55
Reaction score
22
Age
62
Non 107 have to abide to the same restrictions. They are just vague and people find loopholes.
Then please copy and and paste the faa text restricting non 107 pilots with the rules. I do not believe they exist. By posting what you were saying that exists will help us all understand more the non 107 rules. the Only Rule that I'm aware of if you can't fly over 400 feet. Stay away from airports and temporary restricted airspace. There is no minimum ground altitude and there is no minimum on who you fly over Who You video end clothing the public swimming pool in there by where I can hover and video. I don't do that but I know it will be done by some. I think though however they should keep drones out of Elementary schools and there playgrounds. Other than this there should be no restrictions so please copy and paste. Drc phd
 
Joined
Oct 24, 2018
Messages
1,150
Reaction score
764
Then please copy and and paste the faa text restricting non 107 pilots with the rules. I do not believe they exist. By posting what you were saying that exists will help us all understand more the non 107 rules. the Only Rule that I'm aware of if you can't fly over 400 feet. Stay away from airports and temporary restricted airspace. There is no minimum ground altitude and there is no minimum on who you fly over Who You video end clothing the public swimming pool in there by where I can hover and video. I don't do that but I know it will be done by some. I think though however they should keep drones out of Elementary schools and there playgrounds. Other than this there should be no restrictions so please copy and paste. Drc phd
Overview of Part 101 regulations

Recreational Fliers & Modeler Community-Based Organizations

Know Before You Fly | Academy of Model Aeronautics

Enjoy the reading. It's rather interesting.
 
Joined
Jan 11, 2019
Messages
15
Reaction score
17
Age
78
Texas, and presumably other states, pick up where the FAA leaves off with laws about who/what you can photograph and from what altitudes. In Texas, it's a criminal misdemeanor to retain or publish a photograph made by an unmanned aircraft of any person's property without that person's permission.

Texas Penal Code
Sec. 423.003. OFFENSE: ILLEGAL USE OF UNMANNED AIRCRAFT TO CAPTURE IMAGE. (a) A person commits an offense if the person uses an unmanned aircraft to capture an image of an individual or privately owned real property in this state with the intent to conduct surveillance on the individual or property captured in the image.
(b) An offense under this section is a Class C misdemeanor.
(c) It is a defense to prosecution under this section that the person destroyed the image:
(1) as soon as the person had knowledge that the image was captured in violation of this section; and
(2) without disclosing, displaying, or distributing the image to a third party.
(d) In this section, "intent" has the meaning assigned by Section 6.03, Penal Code.

Added by Acts 2013, 83rd Leg., R.S., Ch. 1390 (H.B. 912), Sec. 2, eff. September 1, 2013.


Sec. 423.004. OFFENSE: POSSESSION, DISCLOSURE, DISPLAY, DISTRIBUTION, OR USE OF IMAGE. (a) A person commits an offense if the person:
(1) captures an image in violation of Section 423.003; and
(2) possesses, discloses, displays, distributes, or otherwise uses that image.
(b) An offense under this section for the possession of an image is a Class C misdemeanor. An offense under this section for the disclosure, display, distribution, or other use of an image is a Class B misdemeanor.
(c) Each image a person possesses, discloses, displays, distributes, or otherwise uses in violation of this section is a separate offense.
(d) It is a defense to prosecution under this section for the possession of an image that the person destroyed the image as soon as the person had knowledge that the image was captured in violation of Section 423.003.
(e) It is a defense to prosecution under this section for the disclosure, display, distribution, or other use of an image that the person stopped disclosing, displaying, distributing, or otherwise using the image as soon as the person had knowledge that the image was captured in violation of Section 423.003.
 
Joined
Dec 17, 2018
Messages
55
Reaction score
22
Age
62
Thanx, exactly what I responded. The ama is crap. There are a thousand pieces of paper with ama rules with no date. The ama will force you to pay anywhere between 25 to 50 dollars. For a copy undated and only for that area. The ama rules are different in Chicago vs grand rapids. The ama is for rc airplanes. The faa rules are only don't fly over 400 ft. Then the Institute a new ruling requiring the registration number on the outside of the aircraft. I fly regular airplanes and I understand that rule. but for drones they didn't say how big it should be what color what type of lettering should have be on the top or bottom what if I use the wrong magic marker and if it gets wet it falls off. When government becomes anebulous I don't know. Just stay below 400 feet I've had the police over several times coming back to my house to land and flying over a house across the street at a hundred feet he complained and the police said just cool it there are no laws so I know who the *** wipes are in my neighborhood and I just stay away from them. Then again if I choose to fly over them at 100 feet and hover for 20 minutes I am not breaking any law. Please challenge me if I'm wrong
 
Joined
Oct 24, 2018
Messages
1,150
Reaction score
764
Thanx, exactly what I responded. The ama is crap. There are a thousand pieces of paper with ama rules with no date. The ama will force you to pay anywhere between 25 to 50 dollars. For a copy undated and only for that area. The ama rules are different in Chicago vs grand rapids. The ama is for rc airplanes. The faa rules are only don't fly over 400 ft. Then the Institute a new ruling requiring the registration number on the outside of the aircraft. I fly regular airplanes and I understand that rule. but for drones they didn't say how big it should be what color what type of lettering should have be on the top or bottom what if I use the wrong magic marker and if it gets wet it falls off. When government becomes anebulous I don't know. Just stay below 400 feet I've had the police over several times coming back to my house to land and flying over a house across the street at a hundred feet he complained and the police said just cool it there are no laws so I know who the *** wipes are in my neighborhood and I just stay away from them. Then again if I choose to fly over them at 100 feet and hover for 20 minutes I am not breaking any law. Please challenge me if I'm wrong
In what you stated, you are not wrong. Basically the FAA stance in all of this is follow the Part 107 rules but with a few differences, which I posted a link in my post above. You can't fly over 400' like a Part 107 can to go over a structure, or you have to call heliports, airports, etc within 5 miles radius, etc. They also state to follow your local AMA (they use a different wording, but I can't remember it right now) rules, which will apply as well. Depending where you live, there are other laws and ordinance that are in effect. @skymonkey posted them in another thread recently, which affect hobby flier more than they do part 107 pilots. You are correct on saying that you are not violating personal property by hovering someone else's house, but why do it? It will only upset them and complain, with the end result of getting another person campaign against drones. At this stage of the game, we don't want that. Just fly with common sense, don't do anything that you don't want done to you, even if it's legal, and if you can, just avoid people all together. There are some great spots to fly out there, go look for them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PhantomFandom
Joined
Dec 17, 2018
Messages
55
Reaction score
22
Age
62
I guess it just comes down to us good guys we don't go over 400 feet and stay away from airplanes and airports. accept the fact that the police will come over to your house a few times and warn you just to be cool. the same guy across the street whenever I fly well over 200 feet up to 400 feet still calls the police every time it's still on the air. He doesn't have all his marbles so the police have to make a visit and say the idiot across the street called on you and said you were bothering him.
 
Joined
Dec 17, 2018
Messages
55
Reaction score
22
Age
62
He even stands outside with binoculars and calls on airliners at fl 350. I just accept it. However the same chick cop comes over to spank me. I'm starting to like when he calls on me at 300ft. We share our personal lives. Is that 1st base?
 

New Threads

Forum statistics

Threads
136,088
Messages
1,407,519
Members
99,033
Latest member
xisenera